Comments: 7
That was rather brilliant, thank you for sharing =)
Batgrl: Bookish Hooha 8 years ago
I really think he should publish this somewhere in text form because, wow, he sums up so much so well. Plus at the end pointing out how his own understanding changed with age.
Debbie's Spurts 8 years ago
The "redefining" spiel amazon is implementing on goodreads isn't really. Just their first salvo into short term bringing content more in line with what's in amazon ( and driving off members who don't conform or who won't self-edit in an effort to comply) and longer term to ensure there is only enough criticism to "legitimize" the positive content useful for selling products. Hard to integrate all the gif laden reviews onto kindle paperwhite. Amazon will either shutdown competitor goodreads (like Shelfari) or turn it into a positive content mill with "helpful" up/down voting and other options for burying sales-harming content—in the meantime happy to use the reputation as "honest" and uncensored customer reviews, sell and use the huge amounts of data, and have volunteer unpaid librarians plugging away helping integrate and edit amazon site data.
Batgrl: Bookish Hooha 8 years ago
I'm still floored by how little finesse Amazon has in this. Or perhaps that's whoever's currently in management at GR. The New Rules thing rollout was entirely ham-handed. Maybe in a couple years someone will write a book about it - I hope so because I'd love a fly on the wall report on what the reasoning was in all this. "Let's get rid of all the people that review a lot but who cause a lot of problems for authors" seems really too simplistic.

I'm still somewhat amazed by it. I really thought they'd attempt to data mine us first and then set about on sweeping change. They've hardly had enough time to parse out how the users use the site, who the average user is, etc. But then, that explains a lot of the ham-handed part.

I would love to know if the volunteer librarian work has decreased or not. I would like to think it has, but I somehow think it 1) wouldn't be by much and 2) they'd not care either way since Amazon will probably cut that off and do all database work in the distant future.
Batgrl: Bookish Hooha 8 years ago
Oh and I don't think it's entirely Amazon/GR that is doing the "redefining of criticism" - I was thinking more in terms of certain authors. You know, the subset that says "this isn't a proper review, reviews look a certain way, are written using only certain language, and will only be taken seriously if they meet X, Y, and Z criteria." I don't think Amazon itself is trying anything as wide ranging as changing criticism - but in setting up standards it's just fighting a losing battle in that people are now used to "I can say anything on the internet."
Debbie's Spurts 8 years ago
It has. You can judge in librarians group, during September and October the response times slowed a lot (unless required more research, a followup answer from OP or staff exception most posts to librarians get done in under 15 minutes, often within 2 minutes with multiple librarians tripping over each other; went to 30 minutes to 5 hours average and longer response times post announcement spreading). And now they've approved lots of new librarians. Not that hard because they get applications all the time. Currently Rivka and others are busy revoking all the author requested changes that the newbies are doing against policies. Fivver and other paid reviewers sneak in so they can upcharge by being a gr librarian (apparently authors paying for that service don't realize only staff can delete bad reviews or member shelves). Author socks always applying to do things like change bookcovers on members book catalogs so old covers can be eradicated, delete books as soon as a bad review or rating popsup to create a new unreviewed version (I've even seen sock puppet librarians take a similar book by a nongoodreads author with rave reviews and alter cover, title, isbn and author so those great reviews show on their author's page)--the sock and fivver accounts don't last once discovered and changes get revoked but it does happen and if author can get a sock librarian's edits to go undiscovered long enough for a book's new launch, a giveaway, or other event they are happy and could care less if librarian status or even entire account of the sock gets deleted. A lot if librarians are keeping their status but only doing edits that aid their own book cataloging; even before policy changes some were doing that because did not want to work for free for amazon.
Batgrl: Bookish Hooha 8 years ago
I'm trying not to feel evil for being happy to hear that - but only because I really want the people who aren't doing the work now but who did SO much work in the past to REALLY be missed and noticed by management. Not that I think it'll make any difference.